Wild Bill

Well, if you don't like 'scam' how about 'ignorance'? Dalton and his crew obviously have no idea about technology or business themselves. They think they can set up an artificial situation with a huge price for green power generation, paying for it out of tax money, in order to establish an industry. Once the industry is established they take it for granted that prices will drop to the point where wind and solar are competitive, removing the need for any subsidy. What if it's just not possible to lower wind and solar pricing that far? What if there is a limit on how much cheaper or more efficient we can make solar cells? Already, we make generators that are as efficient as anyone could ask. How much improvement can we expect for the cost of wind power? As I said, Dalton and his crew are taking all the technical side of things for granted, expecting the industry to just wave a magic wand and invent anything they desire. Mother Nature's Laws of How the Universe Works might very well throw things a curve. Meanwhile, there are tried and proven technologies to make coal burning plants pristine clean! Not to mention how natural gas is a quantum level cleaner even before you add scrubbers and the like. These technologies would be FAR cheaper than Dalton's MicroFit program! Yet Dalton has already said he will junk coal and gas burning. Therefore, because of the political optics he will NOT look at clean coal or gas as an alternative! The same mindset was in operation during Bob Rae's tenure as premier of Ontario. Ruth Grier was his environmental minister and she and the NDP were absolutely against incineration to get rid of garbage! However, other options were proving to be far more expensive. Meanwhile, there were American incineration garbage operations using plasma torch and other technologies that were not only as clean as anyone could ever want but were built right within communities, with lawns and trees in parks on the top! These American operators were so interested in building some plants in Toronto and getting the contracts to handle the garbage stream that they actually offered to fly Ruth and her entourage down to one of their plants for her inspection, paying the entire shot for the trip! What happened? What you would think, of course! Since politically the NDP had been public with its decision they absolutely refused to talk to or about these operations at all! This is why I believe that letting politicians make decisions on these technical issues is a cure far worse than any disease! A dart thrown at a board full of balloons would have a better chance of making an intelligent decision.

Correct me if I got the wrong idea, Michael. You seem to be implying that those against the man-made climate change issue are all bloggers or rightwing talk show hosts. Do you really believe this to be true? That there are no or very few real scientists who do NOT subscribe to the AGW position? If so, I can see why you believe the "science has been done and the debate is over! We are right and everyone else is wrong! It's time to make policy!"

By whom? It looked more to me like the AGW people made alibis and excuses for themselves, had a drink of their own bathwater en masse and then the choir declared to the minister that there was no problem with the gospel! They claimed to prove themselves innocent! The very idea is ridiculous!

What a horrible thought! I predict mass suicides among the Boomers old enough to have grown up pre-disco, a la those passengers in the movie "Airplane!" who killed themselves so they wouldn't have to listen to the star spill his life story in the seat beside him! BTW, it was not widely publicized at the time but during the SARS Toronto rock concert a few years ago the lineup was for the most part die hard rock and roll, and so was the audience. The Guess Who and the Rolling Stones were the openers. Celine Dion made a satellite video appearance from Las Vegas. She was soundly booed! Justin Timberlake had water bottles thrown at him and he had to leave the stage! The media had to use some skillful editing to avoid the embarrassment. It was just totally the wrong venue for artists like those two and it shows the ineptness of their management for letting it happen. To use a simile that us older folks can appreciate, it was like having Donny Osmond or Bobby Sherman guest at a Metallica concert. People who really like rock and roll consider pop music for kids and babies, on a par with the Wiggles! They also never liked disco, considering it music for flakes and airheads. Times change, I guess.

Michael, this is another of those important points that illustrate scientific thinking. If it isn't so ingrained that it is instinctive then I don't believe it possible for someone to form a considered opinion on a scientific subject. Science has nothing to do with consensus or compromise! Something is either true or it's false. A fact is or it isn't. One can form opinions on subjects which are still being explored but the debate is always a search for what's true or what's false, NOT on what we can compromise on! A volt will shove an amp through an ohm. Force equals mass times acceleration. There is no compromise! The Universe has LAWS! Mother Nature doesn't give a damn how we feel about someone or if our feathers got ruffled arguing about it. You do things HER way or they won't work! If someone deliberately falsifies a graph or data then their scientific credibility is forever ruined, no matter what the "nobility" of their goals, the importance of the subject or the justification of their ends. There has been some research that if you don't teach someone the scientific method before the 7th grade he likely will never be able to fully comprehend it as an adult. From talking to people over the years I've come to believe it. That's why I rarely bother to try to change someone's opinion or even justify my own. Too often it's just a waste of my time! As I've grown older I find I husband my time more and more. It's quite precious!

Well, that's it for me, people. I'm putting this "green leprechaun" on 'ignore'. He has descended so low that he's not even humerous anymore! I suspect I won't be alone in this action.

Bonam is NOT lying! He has been on this board YEARS longer than you and has proven his technical background many times! He may possibly be the most technically proficient poster on this board. He's actually working on technology that may someday get some of us off this ball of rock. Can you google "spacex"? BTW, we have a seat reserved for you on the "B" Ark.

I won't argue with your example. It is a non sequitur to my point. If a club posted a sign clearly indicating that it allowed smoking, so that no one who was bothered by smoke need enter, how would a non-smoker be injured? In other words, why are venues for smokers totally verboten? This policy goes beyond protecting non-smokers. It is obvious that there must be a further agenda. BTW, I don't smoke. I just care about the rights of citizens besides myself.

Check out yourself! What's the term for someone who believes he's right about everything, with no valid attempt to have any proof? What do you call someone who uses insults for rebuttal? Perhaps you should scurry over to "rubble.com" where you can unhook your brain and just unleash copious amounts of profanity. I have a hunch it's what you use to feel better.

Ah yes! I asked you questions you can't or don't want to answer. Therefore, I must be a sociopath. I don't agree with you, so therefore I must have some mental problems. Loser!

CitizenX, you gave me a list of what governments and OTHER PEOPLE can and/or should do! No details with any of your "wishes", either. Anyone can say "better building codes" or "more fuel efficient cars". Big deal! Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself. Just what building codes do you suggest? Do you have any idea at all of practical building codes that would work and that ordinary working people could afford? Do you know HOW to build a more fuel efficient car? Anyone can expect OTHER PEOPLE to dream up ideas that actually work! It's all just magic! That's what technical people do, right? We just dream up anything we want and expect the techies to figure out how to do it, in a price range we can afford. They just have to wave those magic wands! I'd like a pony! Hey, I'd like everyone to have a pony! Get someone else do do it and get the government to deliver it! I'm yammering for those ponies! I'm doing the important part! The rest is just details, right? I was asking what YOU PERSONALLY could do! Besides attend demonstrations and "raising awareness". I suggest that anyone who can't do at least some if not most of the things I suggested is really just someone who can't contribute a single practical thing, including a proper understanding of what's involved. You know, the person on "Survivor" who everyone wants in SOMEONE ELSE'S TRIBE! What can you do personally to "go green", CitizenX? Can you build a wind or solar power installation yourself? Do you have any idea of what's involved? Can you even fix a broken plug on a lamp? Or is changing an incandescent light bulb over to a CFL the limit of your technical expertise? As I said, riding a bike and attending demonstrations does mice nuts to reduce carbon. What can YOU do for REAL?

Have you no sense of practicality? The USA will ALWAYS be our major trading partner, unless somebody comes up with a way to ship goods for free! We have OCEANS on either side of us, or hadn't you noticed? It costs MONEY to fly or ship by boat any goods for trade! Shipping is NOT cheap! Or do you believe that there is so much profit margin in most trade goods to easily absorb shipping costs, just because folks like YOU don't like America? If you ran a business it would go broke before it opened its doors!

Exactly, BC! Or why Mom can't take 3 toddlers in tow and go get a week's worth of groceries, all on that same bike, in January! This is why I just can't buy the AGW arguments! The people involved and their public pronouncements are ALWAYS so ridiculously impractical! Few of them if any show the slightest clue about the technical factors involved, yet ONLY technical factors can possibly make a positive reduction in our carbon footprint, which these people are claiming is of absolute importance! If 50% of the AGW proponents in Canada read a few books and got themselves wholely or even partially off-grid, I'll bet we would exceed even those silly Kyoto targets Chretien made those broken promises about! Of course, we'll never see it happen. These people can't even change the oil in their own car, or repair a broken extension cord, or wire up a new basement rec room, or solder up some copper pipe in their house plumbing, or even grow some damn carrots, for Pete's sake! They can't do a single blessed damn practical thing, just bitch! If we were on a "Survivor" island the only thing they could contribute to our survival is their bodies for fish bait! Certainly, it would be a waste of resources to feed them!

You COMPLETELY missed my point, Michael. Again, I might add! My post to CitizenX wasn't about his point of view. It was about his ability to actually DO SOMETHING FOR REAL! For purposes of argument I had assumed that "going green" was necessary. I was asking CitizenX if he had the faintest idea of HOW to "go green"! All I had heard from him was a lot of rhetoric and the usual catechism of how IMPORTANT the issue was and how people were going to RISE UP and make their voices heard! Big deal! If you want to reduce your carbon footprint anymore than mice nuts in this country you have to do more than ride a bicycle if the weather is nice and attend some demonstrations. Anybody with hair in their ears can do that! How about actually BUILDING off-grid green power? It means opening a book, learning some science and techology, cutting wires and soldering parts. IOW, using your brain instead of your mouth! I notice I still haven't seen any reply from him. I really don't expect him to answer any of my questions. I don't really believe he can do anything but get together with other folks who couldn't replace a plug on a lamp and "raise their awareness"!

Quebecers ARE emotional! Separatism is emotional by definition! It's all about having your own country, your own sense of nationalist pride, of tribalism in the extreme. Is it your position that Quebecers have coldly and logically decided that separation would be a big improvement to their ECONOMIC well-being? The whole issue is emotional. If Quebec separates that will have been an emotional decision. The reaction from the rest of Canada will be in the same vein. It's just human nature.

Well, let's find out how smart YOU are! Can you build a wind generator? Do you understand the differences between different kinds of batteries? Do you know roughly what is the power demand of your home per typical day? Quick now, don't stop to google or buy a book! We want to know just how much you actually know about "going green" than just attending demonstrations. What's the typical efficiency of commonly available solar cells? What direction should they be pointed in on your roof? What's an inverter? Can you build one, or at least, if you buy one choose one that's appropriate for your installation? How many watts does your installation need to generate? What was your assumption as to the size of the battery bank? At the present price of electricity, how long will it take you to pay back the cost of that 13 watt CFL bulb? If you can't do all this then you really have no idea how to "go green", unless you simply choose to go live in a teepee instead! Why don't you read some textbooks and DO something, rather than just memorize silly chants for the next G20 protest?

I'm not denying what you're saying about how there's nothing to be gained by being vengeful. That's exactly what lawyers tell their clients when in the middle of a divorce negotiation. I'm not denying that what you describe would be for the best! I'm stating what I believe to be the reaction of the rest of Canada! Do you believe that I'm wrong? The ruling party at the time would be the one representing the rest of Canada at the negotiations. Do you really think they would retain power the following election if people thought they were "nice" to Quebec? You talk of what you think people SHOULD do! I speak of what they WOULD do! When people are revved up emotionally being calm and rational goes out the window.

Michael, again I say that I don't think I can make you properly understand. I have read your posts on this subject for a long time now. You have never been technical yourself in your arguments. You have been logical, within the limits of your understanding but you can logically prove anything if you don't allow any contrary factors into the equation. I believe that it would take a LONG time to give you enough background not to prove or disprove the climate change argument but to get you to the level where you could properly form your OWN opinions! Besides, I have not formed my opinions by taking on the arguments point by point. That's a trap to get one into a mug's game of trying to refute one thin argument after another. Rather, I have followed how those pushing the climate armageddon arguments have exaggerated and pontificated. They cite one argument with weak evidence and its shot down. They cite another and another, each being shot down in turn. Then they claim that because of all these arguments where there's smoke there must be fire! When they actually fabricate evidence, as with the "hockey stick" graph and with the "climategate" emails, they are excused, by claiming the incidents are really not that important to the total argument (this after being cited as absolute proof!) or in the final analysis, forgivable since it is so important to "save the planet" that the end justifies the means. I'm not trying to convince anyone, Micheal. Certainly not you. I simply have my own criteria for a credible sounding scientific arguement and so far nothing has passed the "smell test" as far as I'm concerned. Meanwhile, as I've said, the meme has become a religion and it is pointless to bang one's head against the wall, trying to stamp out the new faith.

Michael, I can honestly say that I have never listened to one of those "radio jockeys"! I was reading before I went to kindergarten and even then science of all kinds fascinated me. The first book I can remember owning (outside of the usual Dr. Seuss books my parents provided) was a Dictionary of Aerospace and Astronautics, given to me by my 2nd grade teacher personally. She had been impressed that I had already gone through all the science books in the school library. I spent my career selling electronic parts to manufacturers, starting with the introduction of the first 5volt only Intel microcomputer chip. I make it now as a tech, building and repairing guitar amplifiers. I've just moved and haven't bothered with cable. I can get PBS and that's enough! I've no degree but I'm an accomplished "amateur". I know enough math to integrate e to the xth power! Not only am I a radio ham operator but I actually have built much of my own equipment! So my opinions are at least a bit considered, Michael. It is BECAUSE of my background that I do not buy in to much of the "climate change - all man's fault" argument! I don't mean to be patronizing or insulting Michael when I say I think my opinion has more scientific basis than perhaps your own! Certainly, more than the average Arts graduate. Unfortunately, if someone doesn't have a high enough basic level of science in the first place it can be almost impossible to convince them! They form their opinions on the confidence inspired by the showmanship or prestige level of their sources, which is not scientific at all.

This is the great myth! The idea that we have to have "reasonable negotiations" is not supported by human nature. What do you think would happen to any party in power at the time of such negotiations if the people remaining in Canada believe they are being at all "soft" on Quebec? Remember, there will no longer be any votes available from Quebec! They will come solely and only from the rest of Canada, where the bulk of people are likely to be hurt, angry and vengeful! They will want blood and the ruling party had better deliver or they will go down in flames at the next election and likely for the half dozen or so after that! People as a whole will be too emotional to allow your scenario to proceed. Our Jack Weber is a far better example of the average Canadian than you may think. No, we won't likely want to go to armed conflict but we certainly will refuse to give in on much of anything. There will be a lot of "tit for tat" actions. Quebec may wind up erecting tolls on the TransCanada Hwy, nicking the wallets of those traveling to the East Coast to try to raise enough revenue to pay for that $7 daycare. Personally, I believe that if separation ever appears to be a serious threat again non-Quebec leaders should be extremely emphatic about the financial aspects, making it plain to Quebecers just how much money will no longer be available. If there will be no more money from Ottawa this will put immediate pressure on any separatist party to explain just how they will cover the loss. Trudeau's way WORKED at the first referendum! Quebecers are just like any other human beings. They worry about their old age pensions, their "baby bonus", their health plans and unemployment insurance. In the event of a separation, there is no way in Hell the rest of Canada would be inclined to share ANY of that with them!

I see. If we don't believe your two examples then we have to believe three others, also unproven. Hard sciences and math should be COMPULSORY until Grade 12! No one should be allowed to graduate if they can't at least work with the Binomial Theorem.

No need to invoke a conspiracy, Michael. I'm simply talking about human nature! Most folks believe what's trendy. They will believe Oprah over Richard Feynman. I believe that "climate change...it's all Man's fault!" is a meme that has grown to the point where more people believe it than those believing in astrology or UFOs/ This is more than enough to steer society's institutions. Politicians believe it, judges believe it and so on. There was a time more people believed in the Beatles than Jesus! The reason my argument seems to shocking or extreme to you is because you likely have not had reason to challenge a lot of commonly accepted premises. Most people get their beliefs from each other and the media. Reporters are virtually never chosen for their science knowledge. The average level of skepticism is much closer to the trailer park than Steven Hawking. Yet that mass of people dominates the electorate. which INCLUDES the politicians! No need for a conspiracy at all.

Why did no one charge Robert Preston in "The Music Man", Michael? You're arguing against human nature! "Green" is a religion these days. Almost anything is accepted as true in the name of "green", except by a few posters to boards like MLW, who of course only disagree because they are part of the great oil company's conspiracy to kill us all in the name of profit. Charging someone for promoting a green project would be like eating kittens. It just is never going to happen!

Then sadly Tim, "green" will ALWAYS cost more! Why? Because people will have no choice but to accept the "solutions" that are offered to them and those solutions will ALWAYS cost a premium! It's simple marketing. First you condition people to expect to pay a premium to "save the planet". Then you price your "solution" as much above what people are paying now as you think you can gouge. As a sidebar, isn't it interesting that at the same time as we are slowly developing electric cars that will cost us less than gasoline to operate we are seeing trends like McGuinty's expensive MicroFit program, where wind and solar power get paid up to ten times the rate for regular power, driving up the cost of utility power to compensate. Eventually, we can be sure that we will not only pay as much for electricity as we are paying now for gasoline but we will actually pay MORE! I'm reminded of when lead was banned in gasoline and we all paid MORE for unleaded gas at the pump, when lead was an additive!

Tim, you keep missing my point! I'm NOT talking about using car batteries! Here's the flow chart: Prius gets totaled in an accident. Car ends up in wrecking yard. How much for the battery from this source? Or how about when someone scraps a 10 year old hybrid? Could the batter still be useful in a home power application? Can I be any plainer?